Dallas is tough because they probably have the best roster in the division at the top (and probably top to bottom), but:

1) they've had that in other years, and they've been awful

2) they're such a poorly coached team, that you never expect them to overcome any sort of obsticle

The Giants seem to be getting a huge pass from many pundits. I suppose it's a pass they've earned (as opposed to Dallas, who doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt), but they are not a good team and, well, it's okay to say that in preseason predictions. It's a bad defensive team with a bad offensive line and no running game. That's 8-8 city right there.

I think most have the Eagles pegged correctly. It's an organization that is at a low point in the amount of talent it has on the roster. But they won't be as bad as last season. They also won't be as good as they were in 2010 or 2011.

I'm not sure Dallas' roster at the top if significantly better than anyone else's. I am pretty sure their roster top-to-bottom is not. I feel better about our depth. In the past NY definitely had better depth too. Not sure now. JJ's biggest issue is he can't build depth...not a good enough football guy to do it.

Agreed. Everyone talks about all this talent that Dallas has, but when you compare it to other teams basically 15 up to number one, they're all quite comparable. If they had 5 future HOFers then I'd agree, but they have: Romo, Bryant, Witten, Ware, Lee... I'm sure I'm forgetting one or two, but couldn't you list that about a ton of teams?

__________________Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.

Agreed. Everyone talks about all this talent that Dallas has, but when you compare it to other teams basically 15 up to number one, they're all quite comparable. If they had 5 future HOFers then I'd agree, but they have: Romo, Bryant, Witten, Ware, Lee... I'm sure I'm forgetting one or two, but couldn't you list that about a ton of teams?

Romo is obviously very good, Ware too. Witten has always been fantastic but is getting a little old. I like Lee a lot. Murray is good but not better than at least 2 other of his division peers. Bryant may be their best player and is probably the best WR in the division.

Swap out the names and positions and we could write the same thing about NY and us.

Romo is obviously very good, Ware too. Witten has always been fantastic but is getting a little old. I like Lee a lot. Murray is good but not better than at least 2 other of his division peers. Bryant may be their best player and is probably the best WR in the division.

Swap out the names and positions and we could write the same thing about NY and us.

Alot of good, fantastic, and best for a team thats never done a damn thing.

Ware, Spencer, Lee, Carter, Bryant, Witten, Romo are all pro-bowl caliber. And I might even toss in Austin for this year as well. I think he will have a career season.

Bryant and Austin are 1 & 2. but in 3 WR sets, Austin will move to the slot for the first time in his career. I like the possibilities of the mismatches this will create for him. And this is probably his last season his Dallas, so he could cash in next year.

I'm not sure Dallas' roster at the top if significantly better than anyone else's. I am pretty sure their roster top-to-bottom is not. I feel better about our depth. In the past NY definitely had better depth too. Not sure now. JJ's biggest issue is he can't build depth...not a good enough football guy to do it.

No, it's not significantly better. It's depth is also lacking. If you compare it to the Giants roster instead of our roster, its clear that they have 1) more strengths, and 2) fewer weaknesses.

The biggest problem with the Dallas roster is that they nonsensically tried to keep it together for this season at the expense of the ability to keep it together in future years. It's already an old roster, and really, this year is the "last go". Its got a lot of talent, but it's poorly managed talent and the coaching hires have been abysmal.

I think that you could argue that our roster is better top to bottom, and I know for a fact we have better depth, but they have two or three more star level players and that's a lot to make up in terms of depth.

Either way, I wouldn't expect Dallas to finish any closer than two games below us in the division. They are run really stupidly.

__________________ according to a source with knowledge of the situation.

Dallas' issue isn't the top, like when Vinnie was here, the top is good or very good. BUT, they have no depth. That's why I laugh when pundits rave about the Waters signing. Fact is, by mid season, they will lose a key player - maybe 2, EVERY team does, but the well-built teams have depth to adjust. When we lost Orakpo, it hurt for several games while the depth adjusted, when they lost Lee their fan base cried injuries (even though by games lost to injury stats they had just a few more games then we did).

Bryant/Jackson/Cruz in division will get their scores against teams, but ultimately all three of those teams fail at the depth issue.

Agreed. Everyone talks about all this talent that Dallas has, but when you compare it to other teams basically 15 up to number one, they're all quite comparable. If they had 5 future HOFers then I'd agree, but they have: Romo, Bryant, Witten, Ware, Lee... I'm sure I'm forgetting one or two, but couldn't you list that about a ton of teams?

I'm sure you could get a list of 8-10 teams who have the same top end talent as Dallas...just not in the NFC East.

Dallas' issue isn't the top, like when Vinnie was here, the top is good or very good. BUT, they have no depth. That's why I laugh when pundits rave about the Waters signing. Fact is, by mid season, they will lose a key player - maybe 2, EVERY team does, but the well-built teams have depth to adjust. When we lost Orakpo, it hurt for several games while the depth adjusted, when they lost Lee their fan base cried injuries (even though by games lost to injury stats they had just a few more games then we did).

Bryant/Jackson/Cruz in division will get their scores against teams, but ultimately all three of those teams fail at the depth issue.

Their depth is like ours, it's highly concentrated. None on the offensive line, none in the secondary, remarkably little at the WR position for a team that you think of as having a boatload of skill talent.

They have a lot of front seven guys and an established backup quarterback. But as always, it's going to be tough for them to weather injuries.

__________________ according to a source with knowledge of the situation.

Bryant/Jackson/Cruz in division will get their scores against teams, but ultimately all three of those teams fail at the depth issue.

How so ?

__________________ ....DISCLAIMER: All of my posts/threads are my expressed typed opinion and the reader is not to assume these comments are absolute fact, law, or truth unless otherwise stated in said post/thread.

Their depth is like ours, it's highly concentrated. None on the offensive line, none in the secondary, remarkably little at the WR position for a team that you think of as having a boatload of skill talent.

They have a lot of front seven guys and an established backup quarterback. But as always, it's going to be tough for them to weather injuries.

Tripp, you are just wrong. We have solid depth across the board, our starters may be weak - ie Safeties, but our depth can come in and play to a reasonable level, as was proved last year.

I hesitated in putting the Giants into that mix, but your depth is mainly poor because again this year you are already depleted by the injury issue. If you ever have a healthy team again, you will be good at depth.

I could do the same for Defense. Point is the depth of the Cowboys is VASTLY inferior to our depth, while their #1s are, in some cases, better than ours, but not overwhelmingly so.

I'm not in disagreement necessarily about the quality of our depth vs. Dallas', but I do see that you've bought into the narrative around this team, so there's really no point for me to take the discussion further.

I'll gladly concede any debate about the Redskins and the Cowboys depth charts, but you can't look at our backup OL, see starting quality across the board, and be taken seriously. It's a non-starter.

__________________ according to a source with knowledge of the situation.